Riders Lodge Sdn Bhd v Tropik Sentosa Sdn Bhd & Anor [2020] 8 AMR 283

[Claim for specific performance – refusal by defendants to renew lease] Justin was the counsel for the plaintiff. This case deals with the important issue of the Specific Performance of a Lease Arrangement for 30 years structured with an initial 5 years plus subject to a Renewal every 5 years for 5 renewable terms. The High Court granted the said Specific Performance after a Full Trial based on inter alia the following: (a)The Court held that there was an agreement between parties of a 30 years lease broken down to 6 terms of 5 years each and the option to renew the said Lease lies solely and absolutely on the Plaintiff. (b)The Court held that the doctrine of equitable estoppel apply to the present case to prevent the Defendants from the non- renewal of the Lease and/or alleging that he Plaintiff is a “monthly tenant” given the huge sums of monies expended by the Plaintiff to build the Horse Ranch ( Riders Lodge) on the said Land and rely on remaining tenure of the 30 years lease promised from the outset. (c)The earlier notice by the Plaintiff’s solicitors’ letter dated 6/1/2009 asked for renewal for another 5 years and “thereafter for each renewal due” and this phrase clearly shows the Plaintiff intended to renew the lease not only for the period of 5 years from 21/5/2009 to 20/5/2014 but also for the 4 renewable terms of 21/5/2014 to 20/5/2019 (third term), 21/5/2019 to 20/5/2024 (fourth term) , 21/5/2024 to 20/5/2029 ( 5th term ) and 21/5/2029 to 20/5/2034 ( 6th term). (d)The Defendants who received gross revenue sharing (which only exists under the lease agreement) and/or who accepted rent with knowledge of the cause of forfeiture had thereby waived the forfeiture. (e)On the separate loan issue, when a loan is unsecured, non-interest and has no fixed repayment terms, the said loan is repayable within a reasonable time of a request for repayment depending on the circumstances of the case and it is not repayable immediately. It is untenable for a demand for the repayment of the said Loan to be made all at once when the Plaintiff is generally making losses overall in recent years and an immediate repayment of the said Loan sum is very damaging and harmful to the Plaintiff’s business, operation and finances. The Court granted a specific performance of the renewal of the lease until 2034 and also the Plaintiff is entitled to lodge a caveat on the said Lease Land to protect the Plaintiff’s interests.